Is the new Mac Pro a failure?

[tuxon86]

Yeah, I'm no creative professional (I'm a network engineering educator primarily teaching Cisco CCNA and CCNP), but every time I try out GIMP I'm about to throw my computer out of the window, I understand that no "real" creative professional deals in GIMP. I've never heard of ANY serious "creative professional" using Linux for something real...

I'm OS agnostic myself... While Gimp is kind of meh, Krita on the other hand is quite nice and does compete with Corel Painter.
[doublepost=1452608595][/doublepost]

I believe the owner of Thunderbolt is not Apple, it's Intel. So much for bias. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface))

Apple own the trademark on Thunderbolt, but the tech is indeed licensed from Intel.

 

[bogg]

I'm OS agnostic myself... While Gimp is kind of meh, Krita on the other hand is quite nice and does compete with Corel Painter.

I'm not really bothered on what OS I use, I've got machines running Windows (Surface Pro 3), FreeBSD, OS X and Linux at home at the moment... I do prefer OS X though, but mostly because I'm used to it.

Apple own the trademark on Thunderbolt, but the tech is indeed licensed from Intel.

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/trademarks/thunderbolt.html

Intel owns the trademark, Apple registrered it first, but in 2011 it transfered the rights to intel: http://appleinsider.com/articles/11...ights_will_be_transferred_from_apple_to_intel

 

[tuxon86]

I'm not really bothered on what OS I use, I've got machines running Windows (Surface Pro 3), FreeBSD, OS X and Linux at home at the moment... I do prefer OS X though, but mostly because I'm used to it.



http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/trademarks/thunderbolt.html

Intel owns the trademark, Apple registrered it first, but in 2011 it transfered the rights to intel: http://appleinsider.com/articles/11...ights_will_be_transferred_from_apple_to_intel

Thanks, I only rememberd the original registration by Apple.

 

[996085]

Software RAIDs are never a problem moving between computers as long as the OS is the same (linux MDraid and LVM volumes are a no brainer to move, as are zraids, btrfs pools and also OS X and Windows software raids).
The problem is with some hardware raids (and I'm talking about REAL hardware raid cards, not most $100 software/hybrid-raid-disguised-as-hardware raid cards out there), in those cases you really need the exact same model or atleast a card in the same series to be able to recover the data. If the card is EOL and you can't get a second hand one, too bad for you.

Why not just move the card from the failed system to the new system?

 

[bogg]

Why not just move the card from the failed system to the new system?

Well, If the hardware raid card is broken, what good is it to move it? in the case that something else in the system breaks, sure, move the card and the corresponding drives and it will work fine

 

[wallysb01]

I believe the point he's trying to make in the internal vs external storage discussion is that if you've got your storage internally in a workstation and say the logic board dies, the workstation is offline and your data is too until you replace the logic board (that is, both the data and the workstation is useless). If the same happens and you use a NAS, the data is still accessible, if the NAS dies the data is gone until it is fixed but the Workstation is still online.

So by creating two PoFs you've basically covered your ass. Sure the workstation could be more or less useless without the shared data, but hopefully you've got some work to do which doesn't require the data until the NAS is fixed (and vice versa, if the workstation dies your company hopefully has a few other workstations as well).
It's about keeping downtime to the least possible time.

Personally at home I've got 3 NAS:es to store my data (one for backups, one for movies, pictures, tv-shows and so on and a third to backup the other two). I've tried to cover my ass as much as possible so that my data will always be accesible.
At work I've got offsite backups from our storage and that offsite backup can be used as working copy of the data if the main storage dies (so I'll never have downtime there either).

Ideally you always have at least 2 PoFs anyway, like your home system you describe. This is why I don't really understand this whole point about external storage. Never mind that the cMP form factors could do all this anyway....

 

[996085]

Well, If the hardware raid card is broken, what good is it to move it? in the case that something else in the system breaks, sure, move the card and the corresponding drives and it will work fine

How is a failed RAID card relevant to the cMP or nMP? If an external controller RAID fails is it any different than an internal RAID controller failing? Regardless weren't we discussing system failures?
[doublepost=1452632678][/doublepost]

I believe the point he's trying to make in the internal vs external storage discussion is that if you've got your storage internally in a workstation and say the logic board dies, the workstation is offline and your data is too until you replace the logic board (that is, both the data and the workstation is useless). If the same happens and you use a NAS, the data is still accessible, if the NAS dies the data is gone until it is fixed but the Workstation is still online.

How is a workstation, with internal storage, failing any different than an external device failing? Is there any difference between having to replace one or the other? Is there any reason that you would not have a spare of either available to keep you in business in the event the primary unit fails?

 

[-hh]

just don't forget.. the comparison is being made to cmp.. sheet metal production.

i could, quite literally, model a cmp case tonight.. send it to my guy in the morning.. and have a non-apple made cmp case in my hands by tomorrow afternoon.. like- i'm not even exaggerating..
sheet metal work is really easy and really fast.

And you could just as easily send out a fancy thin wall cylinder to a guy with a 5-axis CNC machine and have a prototype of the nMP's shell in the same amount of time.

how many sheet metal guns do you know about?

Historically, its been done, despite the limitations of tooling technology from 75 years ago. [/URL]

would really like to see them press a chunk of aluminum to a thousandth that's the size of nmp instead of the size of a bullet casing.

You first need to demonstrate just what level of dimensional precision is actually required.

From a pragmatic engineering standpoint, if the nMP's case NEEDS to be held to only a thousanth, it is a profoundly bad product design. Period, full stop.


Only then can we talk about how since the 1850s there's been advancemens, such as as how there's 105mm and [URL='http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/data/3679/medium/120mm_AT_01.jpg']120mm tank rounds, which do hold tolerances comparable to what the nMP would realistically need ... and do so even when using mere nitrated wood pulp instead of aluminum. [/URL][/URL]
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator'][URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']

also it's not only about the shell..
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']its the core and fan and custom boards which are also adding to the cost.

[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']Sorry, but your comment was on just the case, so to try to raise other factors now is an attempt to move the goal posts.
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']
[URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator']Besides, it isn't like the cMP didn't also have any fans or fins or boards as well ...in fact, the cMP had *more* than one fan, which on its own would be indicative of it having a higher parts count than the nMP and thus, a higher cost. Now granted, PC isn't literally that simple, but despite its fallacies, it does remain a commonly used rule of thumb.


EDIT ...argh, sorry: can't figure out how to undo the "helpful" formatting tool that MR uses these days.[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]

 

[bogg]

How is a failed RAID card relevant to the cMP or nMP? If an external controller RAID fails is it any different than an internal RAID controller failing? Regardless weren't we discussing system failures?

I was answering Wallys question regarding recovering raid sets in another computer, I have said nothing about the cMP or the nMP. For gods sake, can I help and explain a single item to another forum users without being dragged into your damn bickering about the cMP vs nMP?

If you notice I also mentioned BTRFS Pools, ZFS Zraids and linux MDRaid and LVMs in the same post, none of those have anything to do with the Mac Pro and OS X. I was just explaining to wallys-whatever-it-was how and when you can expect to recover from a failed system when you run a RAID set (software raid always ok, hardware raid can be hard if hardware raid card failed). I put no weight in the machine actually running the damn raid...

But to make this relevant in some way or another... Google Apple raid card mac pro and you'll find that apple sold hardware raid cards to Mac Pro 1.1 - 5.1

And no, not every company have another set of $6000 workstations laying around just in case one of the coworkers workstation decides to die. I still only tried to discuss something with Wally-whatever-his-name trying to explain how _i thought_ another forum member thought when he wrote a specific post...

What is with you? Can't a user answer post X without being dragged into a meaningless discussion regarding posts I O and M which were 2 pages before and had nothing to do with that user to begin with?

 

[996085]

Why not just move the card from the failed system to the new system?

I was answering Wallys question regarding recovering raid sets in another computer, I have said nothing about the cMP or the nMP. For gods sake, can I help and explain a single item to another forum users without being dragged into your damn bickering about the cMP vs nMP?

If you notice I also mentioned BTRFS Pools, ZFS Zraids and linux MDRaid and LVMs in the same post, none of those have anything to do with the Mac Pro and OS X. I was just explaining to wallys-whatever-it-was how and when you can expect to recover from a failed system when you run a RAID set (software raid always ok, hardware raid can be hard if hardware raid card failed). I put no weight in the machine actually running the damn raid...

But to make this relevant in some way or another... Google Apple raid card mac pro and you'll find that apple sold hardware raid cards to Mac Pro 1.1 - 5.1

And no, not every company have another set of $6000 workstations laying around just in case one of the coworkers workstation decides to die. I still only tried to discuss something with Wally-whatever-his-name trying to explain how _i thought_ another forum member thought when he wrote a specific post...

What is with you? Can't a user answer post X without being dragged into a meaningless discussion regarding posts I O and M which were 2 pages before and had nothing to do with that user to begin with?

Did you really just respond the way you did? You were responding to my question:

"Why not just move the card from the failed system to the new system?"

Sheesh!

As for the spare workstation do you keep a spare NAS around? If so how is that any different than a spare workstation?

 

[rawweb]

I'll trade any dissatisfied 6,1 user my beefed up 5,1. I'm not using it's potential much these days. lol

 

[flat five]

And you could just as easily send out a fancy thin wall cylinder to a guy with a 5-axis CNC machine and have a prototype of the nMP's shell in the same amount of time.



Historically, its been done, despite the limitations of tooling technology from 75 years ago.



You first need to demonstrate just what level of dimensional precision is actually required.

From a pragmatic engineering standpoint, if the nMP's case NEEDS to be held to only a thousanth, it is a profoundly bad product design. Period, full stop.


Only then can we talk about how since the 1850s there's been advancemens, such as as how there's 105mm and 120mm tank rounds, which do hold tolerances comparable to what the nMP would realistically need ... and do so even when using mere nitrated wood pulp instead of aluminum.

cool

Sorry, but your comment was on just the case, so to try to raise other factors now is an attempt to move the goal posts.

always with 'moving goal posts'.. (not just you.. lots of people here)

here's the post of my you first replied to:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-the-new-mac-pro-a-failure.1939541/page-60#post-22455056

i'm pretty positive i was talking about more than the shell.. in fact, i'm 100% positive.
if you misread then fine.. but that doesn't mean i'm moving goal posts.

Besides, it isn't like the cMP didn't also have any fans or fins or boards as well ...in fact, the cMP had *more* than one fan, which on its own would be indicative of it having a higher parts count than the nMP and thus, a higher cost..

i don't think cmp had fans like the one described here:

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1="20140362522".PGNR.&OS=DN/20140362522&RS=DN/20140362522
[doublepost=1452659543][/doublepost]

EDIT ...argh, sorry: can't figure out how to undo the "helpful" formatting tool that MR uses these days.

 

[MacVidCards]

i don't think cmp had fans like the one described here:

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1="20140362522".PGNR.&OS=DN/20140362522&RS=DN/20140362522

I'm going to guess that you didn't read that link, the vast majority is about the beer can extrusion, width of the lip moulding, etc.

The only parts relating to the fan are below. Note that in Legal Mumbo Jumbo I could spend a few pages describing my shoelaces thusly:


[0116] A thermal management system for a cylindrical desktop computer is described. The thermal management system includes an air exhaust assembly suitable for cooling the cylindrical desktop computer, the air exhaust assembly has an impeller with a hub, a plurality of fan blades protruding radially from the hub, adjacent ones of the plurality of fan blades disposed about the hub at an irregular angular interval, and a support ring integrally formed along a bottom surface of a trailing edge portion of each of the plurality of fan blades, the support ring operative to provide at least structural support to the plurality of fan blades.

[0117] Also included is a plurality of stator blades and the impeller further includes a shaft axially stabilized by a thrust bearing. In one embodiment, the plurality of fan blades comprises backward swept fan blades. In one embodiment, a trailing edge of each of the plurality of fan blades is inclined about 10 degrees more than a corresponding leading edge of each of the plurality of fan blades. In one embodiment, the plurality of stator blades are curved stator blades, oriented in a direction opposite the plurality of fan blades. In one embodiment, air exhausted from the impeller has both axial and centrifugal components. In one embodiment, a geometry of the hub has a contoured geometry configured to contribute to an axial exhaust component of the airflow. In one embodiment, a plenum plate configured to direct air into the impeller. In one embodiment, the plurality of fan blades comprises 57 fan blades. In one embodiment, each fan blade is separated from an adjacent fan blade by a particular angular interval, where when each of the angular intervals is added together the angular intervals add up to 360 degrees, and where a first angular interval is 6.92.degree., a second angular interval is 6.2399.degree., a third angular interval is 6.1458.degree., a fourth angular interval is 5.7145.degree., a fifth angular interval is 5.9564.degree., a sixth angular interval is 5.7037.degree., a seventh angular interval is 5.7124.degree., an eighth angular interval is 5.8201.degree., a ninth angular interval 6.3916.degree., a tenth angular interval is 6.1342.degree., an eleventh angular interval is 6.2996.degree., a twelfth angular interval is 6.8305.degree., a thirteenth angular interval is 6.3928.degree., a fourteenth angular interval is 6.9324.degree., a fifteenth angular interval is 6.79.degree., a sixteenth angular interval is 6.3158.degree., a seventeenth angular interval is 6.6752.degree., an eighteenth angular interval is 6.332.degree., a nineteenth angular interval is 6.8873.degree., a twentieth angular interval is 6.9171.degree., a twenty-first angular interval is 6.529.degree., a twenty-second angular interval is 6.8115.degree., a twenty-third angular interval is 6.1026.degree., a twenty-fourth angular interval is 6.7456.degree.; a twenty-fifth angular interval is 5.7116.degree., a twenty-sixth angular interval is 5.6961.degree., a twenty-seventh angular interval is 6.1673.degree.; a twenty-eighth angular interval is 5.8777.degree.; a twenty-ninth angular interval is 5.8416.degree., a thirtieth angular interval is 5.9396.degree., a thirty-first angular interval is 6.1763.degree., a thirty-second angular interval is 6.692.degree., a thirty-third angular interval is 5.8011.degree., a thirty-fourth angular interval is 6.4961.degree., a thirty-fifth angular interval is 6.4858.degree., a thirty-sixth angular interval is 6.305.degree., a thirty-seventh angular interval is 5.886.degree., a thirty-eight angular interval is 5.6992.degree., a thirty-ninth angular interval is 6.1355.degree., a fortieth angular interval is 6.9192.degree., a forty-first angular interval is 6.4834.degree., a forty-second angular interval is 6.3266.degree., a forty-third angular interval is 6.395.degree., a forty-fourth angular interval is 6.2282.degree., a forty-fifth angular interval is 6.4552.degree., a forty-sixth angular interval is 6.9279.degree., a forty-seventh angular interval is 6.7538.degree., a forty-eighth angular interval is 6.9354.degree., a forty-ninth angular interval is 6.926.degree., a fiftieth angular interval is 6.4034.degree., a fifty-first angular interval is 6.1482.degree., a fifty-second angular interval is 6.4643.degree., a fifty-third angular interval is 5.7442.degree., a fifty-fourth angular interval is 5.7055.degree., a fifty-fifth angular interval is 6.4974.degree., a fifty-sixth angular interval is 6.2366.degree., and a fifty-seventh angular interval is 6.2388.degree..

[0118] A thermal management system for use in a cylindrical desktop computer is described. The thermal management system includes a flow fan an impeller includes a plurality of fan blades configured to exhaust air having both axial and centrifugal components and an air exhaust grill surrounding the impeller and defining a plurality of air vents through which the exhaust air exits the mixed flow fan. In the described embodiment, the plurality of air exhaust vents includes a plurality of ribs configured to cooperate with the plurality of fan blades to impart an increased axial component to the air exhausted from the impeller, and a plurality of stators configured to straighten the air exiting the impeller by substantially removing a tangential component of the air passing through the air exhaust grill.

[0119] In one embodiment, each stator of the plurality of stators has a curved geometry configured to gradually remove the tangential component from the exhaust air such that turbulent flow is substantially avoided. In one embodiment, a curvature of the plurality of fan blades is opposite a curvature of the plurality of stators. In one embodiment, a plenum plate disposed across an inlet portion of the impeller, the plenum plate configured to both direct air into a central portion of the impeller and to function as a shroud to direct air passing through a lower portion of the impeller towards the air exhaust grill. In one embodiment, the impeller further comprises a band coupled to a peripheral portion of the impeller, the band configured to provide structural support to the plurality of blades and to add an additional axial component to a portion of the air it comes in contact with.

[0120] In one embodiment, a thrust bearing is configured to stabilize the impeller. In one embodiment, the impeller further includes a contoured portion configured to impart an axial component to the air prior to the air being engaged by the fan blades.

I'm pretty sure a box fan from Walmart for $9.95 could be described the same way. It's a FAN.

Treating it as a object worthy of devotional prayers doesn't change the fact that it is a plastic bladed fan that spins to blow air.

 

[MacBH928]

My understanding is that you can build a cheaper more powerful wintel machine, so for the pro user I guess yes it is a failure...

Unless there is an advantage to the Pro that can't be built into a Windows machine for similar or cheaper price.

 

[Mactrunk]

Total failure if you want state of the art specs in an upgradable platform.
Shame on Apple.
No longer a worthy force for Mac Pro.

 

[JoSch]

Total failure if you want state of the art specs in an upgradable platform.
Shame on Apple.
No longer a worthy force for Mac Pro.

You never got state of the art specs from Apple.

 

[flat five]

Treating it as a object worthy of devotional prayers doesn't change the fact that it is a plastic bladed fan that spins to blow air.

because me saying cmp didn't have fans like this one means i'm worshipping the computer?

you project and exaggerate what others say far too much for them to have any sort of conversation with you.. like, i couldn't even talk about something as simple as a fan with you because you'd be too busy reading me as saying 'everything apple designers make are amazing and i love them so so much and nobody else in the world could design this and all other fans suck'.

case in point:
me: "i don't think cmp had fans like the one described here:"
you: "Treating it as a object worthy of devotional prayers doesn't change the fact that it is a plastic bladed fan that spins to blow air."


there's no way to have a discussion under these conditions.. only a bick fest is possible.

 

[-hh]

cool

Merely the tip of the technology iceberg that most people aren't aware of...which is the same as how you weren't aware that for decades, there's also extruded case ammunition in diameters a lot larger than mere pistol rounds.

here's the post of my you first replied to:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-the-new-mac-pro-a-failure.1939541/page-60#post-22455056

i'm pretty positive i was talking about more than the shell.. in fact, i'm 100% positive.
if you misread then fine.. but that doesn't mean i'm moving goal posts.

True, you did say "...it depends...", but you then specifically focused on the case (including the kool aid of "...tolerances typically reserved for the aerospace or medical device industries...") and then clearly stated that in your estimate, the cMP's housing "... (minus any components etc) probably cost you less than $500.. nmp is probably costing nearer $1500.."

That's very unambiguously constrained to only be about the computers' cases.

i don't think cmp had fans like the one described here:

Profoundly irrelevant to a simple parts count comparison.


----

Finally, and on my formatting problems, ever since the last MR website upgrade, that format bar isn't visible on my pages to be able to employ using it. Why? No idea.

When I roll my pointer along the top bar (which is solid grey in my view), all I get with a hover over is a bunch of white boxes, each of which contains just a red underline. No icon or descriptive text of any kind.

Oddly enough, this absence is consistent in showing up on multiple different machines running different OS's and Apps. The formatting that I am able to do is from memory of how the "[" bracket code works, but if I make any typographical errors, it is virtually impossible to undo & fix, because once a reply/preview button is hit, the 'source code' is no longer visible in any editing mode I try.

 

[cerberusss]

When I roll my pointer along the top bar (which is solid grey in my view)

Adblocker or some other extension?
[doublepost=1452701279][/doublepost]

My understanding is that you can build a cheaper more powerful wintel machine

Yeah, but that's almost alway the case, right? Do note that I regularly lament that fact. I'm an iOS developer and when Apple released Swift, we started building apps with it. But the compiler was extremely slow and I was working on a base rMBP. I got so sick of the build times that I started looking for faster hardware but the Mac Pro is pretty expensive. At some point, I started looking at Hackintoshes. I'm experimenting with one right now, but really I wouldn't use it in production due to the required fiddling. Even though hardware-wise, you can build something that's very fast for not a lot of money.

 

[-hh]

(UI issues)

Adblocker or some other extension?

Hmm... probably.

There's a heavy batch of corporate lockdown, firewalls and filters, and ever since they finally caught up with me last summer for still having an Admin password five years after they officially abolished our Dept being allowed to have them, there's not anything I can do about it. For the home machine, I think it has Ghostery on it now (fairly recent addition), and I can go check to see if it is the cause.

 

[flat five]

That's very unambiguously constrained to only be about the computers' cases.

hmm. yeah.. i've clarified at least 5 times now to multiple people what i meant in that post.. (even though to me, i still think i said it clearly enough in the original)

it seems to me, you're not actually interested in what i had to say and instead, would rather continue on with trying to tell me i meant something else other than the very thoughts in my head.

so.. let's squash it.. ok?

Finally, and on my formatting problems, ever since the last MR website upgrade, that format bar isn't visible on my pages to be able to employ using it. Why? No idea.

do you see a 'use rich text editor' option underneath your reply window?

------

------



..if so, click that then you should get the formatting bar across the top of the reply box.. (and the wrench icon on the right side of the formatting bar will toggle you back to BBcode editor..



-----

 

[996085]

You never got state of the art specs from Apple.

Are you referring to Mac product line as a whole or just the nMP?
[doublepost=1452707885][/doublepost]

Total failure if you want state of the art specs in an upgradable platform.
Shame on Apple.
No longer a worthy force for Mac Pro.

You bring up a good point. I wonder at what point would the current nMP supports deem the nMP a poor value based on not being updated with newer technology.
[doublepost=1452708029][/doublepost]

hmm. yeah.. i've clarified at least 5 times now to multiple people what i meant in that post.. (even though to me, i still think i said it clearly enough in the original)

it seems to me, you're not actually interested in what i had to say and instead, would rather continue on with trying to tell me i meant something else other than the very thoughts in my head.

There comes a point when you say something like this to so many people that you should be asking yourself if you're the problem and not them.

 

[Lolito]

I don't know if it's a failure. Apple just cares about money, and in money terms, they are just the biggest success ever.

That been said, I have many customers who shot in 4K, they have RED cameras of 12.000€, and they just don't want to buy the trash can. Sooner or later they will be back on windows workstations 80% of then, and the 20% left will go to macbook pro or hackintoshes...

For me, yes it's a big failure.
[doublepost=1452708490][/doublepost]

And the other thing that bugs me is that, for a "Green" company, Apple sure seems to make a lot of disposable goods. Granted, as the resale value of Macs is high, it's pretty easy to sell older systems when upgrading to new ones. Still, there are lots of situations where one may not want to do that. Personally, I'm at an phase where the excitement of change isn't necessarily a good thing, and as I rely upon my systems to keep a roof over my family's head, a wholesale rip and replace can be stressful. Just had that happen with a new 5k iMac that I wound up having to return, after various hardware failures... that cost me productivity and lots of lost time.

Looking at Apple's current desktop/laptop lineup, almost nothing is replaceable or upgradeable. There's noting that can be upgraded on notebooks, and there are even some desktop that users can't upgrade RAM on (iMac 21). Compare this to say.... Dell. I can upgrade just about anything on all of their workstations, and even their laptops are fairly easily-user upgradeable. I was looking at the new whiz-bang XPS 15, and you can upgrade: RAM, SSD, NIC, etc. on that thing. few screws, and you're good to go. As someone mentioned above, this isn't just about future-proofness. Sometimes upgrades are needed for shifting use-cases (eh. CUDA).

So the nMP was largely about moving that product line to a rip & replace model, much like the rest of what Apple sells. Part of me really balks at this, as it's wasteful and seems somewhat greedy. And really, how to they expect us to invest in a workstation that they don't touch for a couple years? Hey, I get them being greedy - but don't try to gouge us with outdated technology, when there are so many better options about.

Speaking of greed, in my case, Apple's recent push to iCloud may be nudging me off of their ecosystem. I've been accustomed to my main workstation being a Mac, because it also served up the family ecosystem stuff locally (iPhoto, iTunes, etc.). This has worked well, enabling family and friends to curate and synchronize stuff locally. Now, with every recent OS X upgrade, Apple is pushing us farther and farther into their overpriced cloud. Some of us don't want every photo or movie we have shared on the cloud, and few of us are willing to pay to do so. And for work, many of us are already locked into some sort of corporate cloud service (I don't see myself insisting my colleagues or partners drop their Box or O365 accounts, for iCloud). This is an alarming trend... much like they did away with upgradeable systems, they are also trying to do away with family/SOHO servers.

From a family-personal perspective, Apple making it hard to update their desktops (nMP, iMAC/Mini) makes them less appealing. And Apple forcing users to rely on their Cloud, vs LAN/WAN services, is disturbing. From a professional perspective, most of the people I work with are 50/50 Mac/Win, so switching wouldn't be that hard.

Anyhow, I postponed my iMac upgrade for a bit longer, to see what Apple does with the nMP. But if it's still not very upgradeable, and they keep pushing local services into the cloud, A Dell Precision workstation is looking very appealing....

Amen brother, amen.

Apple post 2012 is a no go. Soldered ram in all laptops. No mid range tower, just a ****** mac mini's available. The trash can mac pro is a joke.

 

[linuxcooldude]

That been said, I have many customers who shot in 4K, they have RED cameras of 12.000€, and they just don't want to buy the trash can. Sooner or later they will be back on windows workstations 80% of then, and the 20% left will go to macbook pro or hackintoshes...

Amen brother, amen.

Apple post 2012 is a no go. Soldered ram in all laptops. No mid range tower, just a ****** mac mini's available. The trash can mac pro is a joke.

Not everyone wants to buy a PC, its simply a choice they make. Editing 4K on Macs work quite well. I know a friend who edits his 4K on a MacBook Pro, soldered RAM and all. Also know people who moved over to FCP X from Premiere Pro because render times are much shorter. Moved from 2009 Mac Pro to the new 2013 Mac Pro. Its about 40-50% faster for me, so thats all that matters.

 

[Daisy81]

Not everyone wants to buy a PC, its simply a choice they make. Editing 4K on Macs work quite well. I know a friend who edits his 4K on a MacBook Pro, soldered RAM and all. Also know people who moved over to FCP X from Premiere Pro because render times are much shorter.

Out of curiosity are you comparing Premiere Pro on OSX to Final Cut X on OSX or Premiere Pro on a Windows intel machine to OS X?